Boardman flooding meeting was too long and didn't help

Boardman flooding meetingwas too long and didn't help
EDITOR:
The Flooding and Storm Water Management Workshop for Boardman Township started badly and got worse. It was at the Boardman Middle School auditorium. The seats are torture to sit for any time at all, and the trustees made the residents sit for two hours and 45 minutes before letting comments. The high school's $4 million auditorium would provide comfortable seats and solve the problems of hearing and seeing the maps with state of art audio and visual equipment.
The meeting started with a one-hour rambling speech by township Administrator Curt Seditz. This could have been posted on the township's Web page and made available in print at the township hall. Then a discussion on the maps one and two. Since Trustee Elaine Mancini and Trustee Thomas P. Costello said nothing, the rest of the hour and 45 minutes could also be posted on the Web and printed for residents. Trustee Kathy Miller did have a few good questions but not enough to justify sitting for the hour and 45 minutes. This leads me to believe that trustees Mancini and Costello discussed and made decisions behind closed doors, which the Ohio Sunshine Law says is illegal.
Finally, the zoning department was not at the meeting. Zoning should be the first line of defense against flooding and traffic problems. In my case, the zoning inspector will not enforce zoning requirements for a retention pond at the dead end of Sugartree Drive. The retention pond was to collect the water from the parking lot. Twenty years ago, the water was directed toward Sugartree instead of the retention pond as zoning required. The previous zoning inspector and township administrator had countless meetings with hundreds of residents about the parking lot with the retention pond. So why was the zoning requirement for the retention pond not enforced? And why will the current zoning inspector not have the water flowing away from Sugartree and into the retention pond?
DAVID PIPER
Youngstown
Safety concerns demand that there be two officers per car
EDITOR:
This letter is in response to Chief Bush's idea to staff Youngstown police patrol cars with only one officer per car.
As a city resident, I speak for myself and on behalf of the majority of my neighborhood when I say that this is a terrible idea. I see this as nothing more than political venture for Chief Bush so he can campaign to say that he has put "X" amount more of police cars on the street.
The reality is that he is doing nothing more than spreading the officers thin and tricking the city residents into thinking that there are more police officers on the street by using smoke and mirrors instead of using the income tax increase that we all voted for to actually hire more officers for our force.
I do not feel comfortable waiting for two police cars to first meet up before even responding to my house if someone is breaking in when normally a two-officer car would be immediately sent. The sad and unfortunate case is that because of his political tricks to ensure his spot as mayor he is dangerously jeopardizing these officers' lives for his political ambitions!
Has he already forgotten the tragic death of Officer Hartzell and that he was working alone when that occurred? I would venture to say that another officer in the cruiser that fateful morning would have surely changed the outcome of that situation for Hartzell. Unfortunately, it appears that the chief has other ambitions, which are political, and that bettering himself obviously precedes the safety of his officers.
SUSAN BROCK
Youngstown